Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

[quote=Vixen;11951280]I've been told but I don't know. That Knox' supporters are largely:

2. People with a 'claim to fame', such as Stacyhs, with link's to Knox' family, friends or friends of friends.[quote]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

I see you are distorting the truth once again. I have no "link" to Knox or her family. I met her once briefly two years ago. I became convinced of her innocence years earlier so my meeting her has nothing to do with my support of her.

For someone who brings up Knox's "lies" ad nauseum, you have a very tenuous relationship with the truth yourself.

Originally Posted by Vixen

Someone told me you were linked to some guy linked to Knox. Is that not true then?

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

No, that is not true. Like Trump, you should stop listening to "someone" who "tells" you something before making allegations.

Originally Posted by Vixen

Aha! So it is something shameful by your own admission.

What the he** are you blabbering on about now? Do try and keep a rational string of thought here.

Don't let up on this one. This complete invention by Vixen is meant to rile you and divert from her inability to provide cites to the umpteen things we've requested from her.

But it is still a vile invention. It is "Wrongful conviction 101" to level these sorts of baseless accusations at anyone who doesn't regard Amanda as a witch.

Once the accused has been dehumanized, falsely accusing supporters becomes legitimate.

Wrongful Conviction 101.

Oh, don't worry about that! If she does not retract her vile allegation within 24 hours (11:00 AM PDT) I will lodge a complaint with the mods. I have never reported anyone to the mods, but I will not hesitate to do so in this case.

It is obvious what her tactic is as we've seen them all before. When a person cannot defend their position rationally they go on the attack. As the saying goes "the best defense is a good offense". It usually works, except for those who recognize the tactic. When someone has to resort to this tactic, it shows they've lost the debate/argument.

2. People with a 'claim to fame', such as Stacyhs, with link's to Knox' family, friends or friends of friends.

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

I see you are distorting the truth once again. I have no "link" to Knox or her family. I met her once briefly two years ago. I became convinced of her innocence years earlier so my meeting her has nothing to do with my support of her.

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

For someone who brings up Knox's "lies" ad nauseum, you have a very tenuous relationship with the truth yourself.

Originally Posted by Vixen

Someone told me you were linked to some guy linked to Knox. Is that not true then?

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

No, that is not true. Like Trump, you should stop listening to "someone" who "tells" you something before making allegations.

Originally Posted by Vixen

Aha! So it is something shameful by your own admission.

What the he** are you blabbering on about now? Do try and keep a rational string of thought here.

And the hits just keep coming.

When one runs out of "argument" make allegations. Wrongful Conviction 101.

Never defend. Always attack. Wrongful Conviction 101.

When losing try to shift the debate. Even if it means inventing totally ludicrous claims like the "So it is something shameful" "by your own admission" thing above. Then we can have a dandy argument over the obvious. Stacyhs never admitted to that. But the point is not that, the point is that we'll now argue it as if it had been a serious observation on Vixen's part. Wrongful Conviction 101.

__________________In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

1-800 Devry Certificate Receiver Stefanoni definitely doesn't know anything about blood splatter, but the Italian prosecution "experts" in this case just make stuff up anyway so that wouldn't stop her.

However even she isn't dumb enough to produce evidence that a blood dripping knife was in the bathroom, when the only person on Gaia's green earth that voluntarily admitted to being in the bathroom at the same time Meredith was spewing blood from being viciously attacked with a knife, was known knife carrying crook Rudy Guede.

So I think it's safe to say this was something conjured up seconds before being posted by Vixen who definitely doesn't have a delusional fantasy view of this stupid case.

Vixen,
Does it bother you that, at age 30, Amanda Knox is a far more successful author than you will ever be, after being wrongfully imprisoned for four years? She is attractive too, which probably is another source of your resentment.

This is, in fact, a straightforward explanation of why you would choose to bully and hurl abuse at her for the past 8 years.

Originally Posted by Vixen

All in your mind, Babe.

Have you had a New York Times best-selling book? Please let us know the title so we can enjoy read it.

Have you been published (outside the Comments section) in the Los Angeles Times and other major papers? If so, provide links to those also. I'm sure they're interesting reading.

Have you had a New York Times best-selling book? Please let us know the title so we can enjoy read it.

Have you been published (outside the Comments section) in the Los Angeles Times and other major papers? If so, provide links to those also. I'm sure they're interesting reading.

Certainly it couldn't be jealousy. I'm sure it doesn't bother anyone that Amanda is young, beautiful and attracts intelligent men or that she has traveled throughout the world. Or that her articles are published in the New York and LA Times. Or that lawyers pay to hear her speak in LA, Chicago, Toronto and Florida.

__________________“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume

Er you do know who Party Rock is, and who attended his book signing as the loving pair.

Yes I do, Vixen. But what's that got to do with the issue here, Vixen?

I'll remind you of the issue here. You said that a "straightforward explanation" of how Knox became a columnist at the WSH was this:

She only got a column in West Seattle Herald because of the 'novelty value' in having a mu notorious criminal from Seattle writing for them, and the newspaper owner's son got to get his leg over.

And you have precisely zero evidence to support your cause-and-effect claim, Vixen. Unless, that is, you DO have evidence that it a) the cause that it was the ability of the owner's son to "get his leg over" (what a charming turn of phrase from you there, Vixen) and the wish of the newspaper to have a "notorious criminal from Seattle" writing for them which b) resulted in the effect of Knox getting the writing job there.

See the extracts I provided for Stefanoni's testimony, as summarised by Massei, a few days back.

Also, her contribution to Darkness Descending.

Nope, none of that made these statements, Vixen.

This appears to be yet another episode of an attempt at misdirection, by employing the (deeply emotionally dishonest) practice along the lines of "Oh yeah, I provided that evidence a page or two back in the thread - go and read it if you want".

This appears to be yet another episode of an attempt at misdirection, by employing the (deeply emotionally dishonest) practice along the lines of "Oh yeah, I provided that evidence a page or two back in the thread - go and read it if you want".

Surely that couldn't be what's happening here, Vixen? Could it.....?

Vixen provides a lot of false citations. She virtually never cites the exact source and quote to back up her fabrications.

__________________“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume

See the extracts I provided for Stefanoni's testimony, as summarised by Massei, a few days back.

Also, her contribution to Darkness Descending.

How odd...or perhaps not. I looked over Stefanoni's testimony and can find no evidence of your claim whatsoever. Now, if you'd care to re-post or provide a link to your alleged "extracts", you may be able to prove me mistaken. But I doubt it.

If people see her as a fictional character, then maybe she should stop 'releasing' fake news.

No Vixen, you don't get to change the rules on the fly to cover for your failings. You flat out proved you couldn't even comprehend a simple concept covered in a short interview. You had no idea what she was talking about. And now, rather than having the courage to admit you got something horribly wrong, you try to change directions... throw some blame on Amanda. And the irony of it is you've got that all screwed up as well. The fictional character Amanda was created by the media, authors and online bloggers, aided by a steady stream of false information from the investigation. That fictional character started taking shape almost immediately after she was first taken into custody. There are hundreds of newspaper and tabloid headlines/articles, several early books and at least two pro-guilt websites, all created before Amanda ever had a chance to say anything, that proves this point. Those are the ones who created a fictional character names Amanda. Not Amanda.

Just when I think you've hit rock bottom you start digging again. I once said you were nothing if not persistent, but persistence isn't a good thing when all your doing is lying, making mistakes and disgustingly insulting people with false claims. I can only hope you managed to apologize to Stacy by the time I get caught up in this thread, but somehow I doubt it.

All of the flat mates and acquaintances of Mez were interviewed exactly the same way as Knox. Not one of them claimed to have been at the scene and introduced Patrick as the killer/rapist.

Yet Amanda did. So Mignini found Amanda 'special', but not any of the 'British Birds' (as Grinder called them).

You are clearly on a roll... not a good one, mind you, but one just the same.

No one else was seriously considered. We know the police decided that Laura and Filomena had an alibi, as did the British girls. The police questioned them early on, not as suspects but as witnesses who might shed some light on who might be guilty. The British girls gave a statement and then returned to England. And further follow-up with the police were done with the English police. Laura and Filomena immediately lawyered up and so never faced the type of treatment Amanda and Raffaele both claim they received. The police did not tap the phones of anyone other than Amanda, Raffaele and people close to them. And the police never even hinted at suspecting anyone but Amanda and Raffaele, and they made that clear on numerous occasions.

By the time the English girls were home, and Laura and Filomena had their lawyers, Amanda and Raffaele were still rather adamant that they spent the evening together, were not at the cottage and didn't see Patrick. So please, do yourself a favor and don't make a bigger idiot of yourself. Amanda and Raffaele were subjected to far longer interviews and were the only ones interrogated, and they did so without the help of lawyers. So no, your nonsense won't work here. The situations were entirely different.

You are clearly on a roll... not a good one, mind you, but one just the same.

No one else was seriously considered. We know the police decided that Laura and Filomena had an alibi, as did the British girls. The police questioned them early on, not as suspects but as witnesses who might shed some light on who might be guilty. The British girls gave a statement and then returned to England. And further follow-up with the police were done with the English police. Laura and Filomena immediately lawyered up and so never faced the type of treatment Amanda and Raffaele both claim they received. The police did not tap the phones of anyone other than Amanda, Raffaele and people close to them. And the police never even hinted at suspecting anyone but Amanda and Raffaele, and they made that clear on numerous occasions.

By the time the English girls were home, and Laura and Filomena had their lawyers, Amanda and Raffaele were still rather adamant that they spent the evening together, were not at the cottage and didn't see Patrick. So please, do yourself a favor and don't make a bigger idiot of yourself. Amanda and Raffaele were subjected to far longer interviews and were the only ones interrogated, and they did so without the help of lawyers. So no, your nonsense won't work here. The situations were entirely different.

It's the "spaghetti wall " tactic: throw it out there and see if it sticks.

As I said earlier regarding that comments section, the usual crazies have come out in force. One in particular has multiple ID's and likes to post supporting remarks between them making it look like there are multiple people in agreement. He's been doing it for years. That takes a really sick mind.

Yes not sure who you refer to, but I made the mistake of looking there. One prominent poster is clearly on the extreme end of delusion and posted that Guede is innocent and Sollecito and Knox are the real murderers. The cognitive convulsions required to deny the extensive evidence against Guede yet believe in the flimsy case against Knox betrays an inability to think logically.

Yes not sure who you refer to, but I made the mistake of looking there. One prominent poster is clearly on the extreme end of delusion and posted that Guede is innocent and Sollecito and Knox are the real murderers. The cognitive convulsions required to deny the extensive evidence against Guede yet believe in the flimsy case against Knox betrays an inability to think logically.

There's actually at least a logical coherence to that view.

The typical PGP view of the crime is an incomprehensible non sequitur. Knox learns her night shift is canceled, so decides on a 20 minute notice to slaughter her roommate. She grabs a gigantic kitchen knife and puts it in her bag to carry it over back to the cottage. On the way she happens by pure chance to run into Rudy Guede, whom she has never even spoken to. Knox decides the one thing a premeditated murder needs is an extra witness so in her poor childlike Italian she invites him along and he accepts. Once they get there she whips out the knife and starts slaughtering the screaming helpless girl and when Rudy sees this he has an epiphany realizing this is his one and only chance to rape someone since they're going to be dead soon anyway and a criminal's DNA being found all over a white female student's crime scene couldn't possibly backfire against him.

It's so absurd and incoherent that I don't even believe the PGP believe it. I think they consciously tell themselves he was involved but when they think about the crime at a deeper intuitive level, he isn't part of the picture.

Someone who says Rudy is innocent is actually an honest PGP presenting a scenario logically consistent with their position. Rudy was getting hot and heavy on a date with Meredith, he was in the bathroom when Knox and Raff stormed in and killed Meredith, when he got out he briefly saw Raff but not Amanda (which is why he didn't mention her in his confession to his friend) and then went to Meredith's body, flipped out, and left. The students came back later for the staging.

The typical PGP view of the crime is an incomprehensible non sequitur. Knox learns her night shift is canceled, so decides on a 20 minute notice to slaughter her roommate. She grabs a gigantic kitchen knife and puts it in her bag to carry it over back to the cottage. On the way she happens by pure chance to run into Rudy Guede, whom she has never even spoken to. Knox decides the one thing a premeditated murder needs is an extra witness so in her poor childlike Italian she invites him along and he accepts. Once they get there she whips out the knife and starts slaughtering the screaming helpless girl and when Rudy sees this he has an epiphany realizing this is his one and only chance to rape someone since they're going to be dead soon anyway and a criminal's DNA being found all over a white female student's crime scene couldn't possibly backfire against him.

It's so absurd and incoherent that I don't even believe the PGP believe it. I think they consciously tell themselves he was involved but when they think about the crime at a deeper intuitive level, he isn't part of the picture.

Someone who says Rudy is innocent is actually an honest PGP presenting a scenario logically consistent with their position. Rudy was getting hot and heavy on a date with Meredith, he was in the bathroom when Knox and Raff stormed in and killed Meredith, when he got out he briefly saw Raff but not Amanda (which is why he didn't mention her in his confession to his friend) and then went to Meredith's body, flipped out, and left. The students came back later for the staging.

I really don't understand how anyone familiar with the evidence in this case believing that Raffaele and Amanda were involved. Vixen has to create lie after after lie to try and make a semi-plausible argument for guilt. My question is why do they do this?

It would be one thing if we were looking at the same evidence and you believe they were involved. You would still be intellectually challenged, but hat least you were honest about it.

__________________“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume

The typical PGP view of the crime is an incomprehensible non sequitur. Knox learns her night shift is canceled, so decides on a 20 minute notice to slaughter her roommate. She grabs a gigantic kitchen knife and puts it in her bag to carry it over back to the cottage. On the way she happens by pure chance to run into Rudy Guede, whom she has never even spoken to. Knox decides the one thing a premeditated murder needs is an extra witness so in her poor childlike Italian she invites him along and he accepts. Once they get there she whips out the knife and starts slaughtering the screaming helpless girl and when Rudy sees this he has an epiphany realizing this is his one and only chance to rape someone since they're going to be dead soon anyway and a criminal's DNA being found all over a white female student's crime scene couldn't possibly backfire against him.

It's so absurd and incoherent that I don't even believe the PGP believe it. I think they consciously tell themselves he was involved but when they think about the crime at a deeper intuitive level, he isn't part of the picture.

Someone who says Rudy is innocent is actually an honest PGP presenting a scenario logically consistent with their position. Rudy was getting hot and heavy on a date with Meredith, he was in the bathroom when Knox and Raff stormed in and killed Meredith, when he got out he briefly saw Raff but not Amanda (which is why he didn't mention her in his confession to his friend) and then went to Meredith's body, flipped out, and left. The students came back later for the staging.

Knox had actually spoken with Guede when she served him a drink at work (if you call that talking to someone) and a couple times in passing on the street... just a "ciao". Then there's the "hi" when the group ran into him on their way back to the cottage and the boys downstairs invited him to come. That's about it. Hardly the kind of relationship where she'd say to herself "We need a threesome to really make Meredith sorry for taking my job at Le Chic, stealing Giacomo and being prettier and more popular than me. Raff and I can't handle it alone. Besides, we can blame it all on him because he's black. I'll just be sure to clean up all our DNA, fingerprints, etc and leave his. Easy peasy!"

I've decided not to report Vixen for accusing me of the vile lie of "cruelly mocking another poster's disabled child just because he is PGP". The fact that she has failed to provide any evidence of such an incident is enough. I'd rather her false and sick accusation stay here for all to see than have it deleted.

How are you coming along on your put-up-or-apologise&withdraw scheme on your accusation that I am "prone to hero-worship or infatuation"?

Or were you hoping that the matter would simply get forgotten as the pages of the thread turned? Surely not....?

The job was a joke. Amanda was considering quitting and there is NO Evidence that Meredith was even looking for a job much less trying to replace Amanda at this poor paying one. I'm curious, Amanda had years of work experience as a barista in Seattle. Had Meredith any experience in restaurant work of any kind? Any work experience at all?

__________________“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume

The job was a joke. Amanda was considering quitting and there is NO Evidence that Meredith was even looking for a job much less trying to replace Amanda at this poor paying one. I'm curious, Amanda had years of work experience as a barista in Seattle. Had Meredith any experience in restaurant work of any kind? Any work experience at all?

Meredith was never offered a job at le Chic. That was just another lie told by Lumumba in his libelous DM hatchet job. No one ever mentioned Meredith saying she'd been offered a job there.

I've decided not to report Vixen for accusing me of the vile lie of "cruelly mocking another poster's disabled child just because he is PGP". The fact that she has failed to provide any evidence of such an incident is enough. I'd rather her false and sick accusation stay here for all to see than have it deleted.

It would be useful to remind Vixen of this lie the next time Vixen bangs on about Amanda telling umpteen lies.

I really don't understand how anyone familiar with the evidence in this case believing that Raffaele and Amanda were involved. Vixen has to create lie after after lie to try and make a semi-plausible argument for guilt. My question is why do they do this?

It would be one thing if we were looking at the same evidence and you believe they were involved. You would still be intellectually challenged, but hat least you were honest about it.

It's a much different case than say, the Jonbenet Ramsey case, where you can go into the thread and see people on different sides of the same ambiguous fence - maybe it was John, maybe it was Burke, or neither, etc etc.

This is a case where the two sides literally see a different reality. This means that, by definition, one side has to be mentally delusional. Machiavelli acknowledges this and claims it's our side, blinded by xenophobia and racism. But the amount of intricate and far reaching conspiracies necessary for the PGP view to be correct, combined with their incoherent crime scenario that has never been satisfactorily explained even among themselves, I would think it would be less exhausting to just concede that the case had its weaknesses.

What I have learned from this case is that if you're emotionally attached to a particular view, your mind can become susceptible to blocking you from seeing what would otherwise be obvious or straight forward conclusions. The PGP had an easier time before the final acquittal, because it was easy to drown out the problems with this case and focus on it being propped up by an official court.

If I ask 1000 normal people what it means when a burglar with a history of rock smashing window climbing break-ins is found standing in a room with a rock smashed window climbed break-in he has no business being in, 1000 people will say "he broke in, duh." Before this case, I wouldn't have thought it possible to prevent people from drawing any other conclusion. But add in a few sinister tabloid photos, claims of DNA being found in a sink, and all of a sudden the very same scenario becomes not just less likely, but literally incomprehensible. The PGP cannot even imagine the possibility of the break-in being legitimate. And that's the power of the mind.

It's a much different case than say, the Jonbenet Ramsey case, where you can go into the thread and see people on different sides of the same ambiguous fence - maybe it was John, maybe it was Burke, or neither, etc etc.

This is a case where the two sides literally see a different reality. This means that, by definition, one side has to be mentally delusional. Machiavelli acknowledges this and claims it's our side, blinded by xenophobia and racism. But the amount of intricate and far reaching conspiracies necessary for the PGP view to be correct, combined with their incoherent crime scenario that has never been satisfactorily explained even among themselves, I would think it would be less exhausting to just concede that the case had its weaknesses.

What I have learned from this case is that if you're emotionally attached to a particular view, your mind can become susceptible to blocking you from seeing what would otherwise be obvious or straight forward conclusions. The PGP had an easier time before the final acquittal, because it was easy to drown out the problems with this case and focus on it being propped up by an official court.

If I ask 1000 normal people what it means when a burglar with a history of rock smashing window climbing break-ins is found standing in a room with a rock smashed window climbed break-in he has no business being in, 1000 people will say "he broke in, duh." Before this case, I wouldn't have thought it possible to prevent people from drawing any other conclusion. But add in a few sinister tabloid photos, claims of DNA being found in a sink, and all of a sudden the very same scenario becomes not just less likely, but literally incomprehensible. The PGP cannot even imagine the possibility of the break-in being legitimate. And that's the power of the mind.

When I came to this case, I assumed...as most people...that the police had it right. After all, they wouldn't arrest suspects if they didn't have a lot of evidence against them, right? But the more I looked into that evidence, the more I realized that "something just ain't right here, sistah". We all want our initial opinions confirmed. But when the evidence so blatantly contradicts those opinions, we need to be willing to say "I could be wrong". I listened and realized I had been wrong. Sadly, some people simply do not have the emotional or moral strength to admit they are wrong.

Certainly it couldn't be jealousy. I'm sure it doesn't bother anyone that Amanda is young, beautiful and attracts intelligent men or that she has traveled throughout the world. Or that her articles are published in the New York and LA Times. Or that lawyers pay to hear her speak in LA, Chicago, Toronto and Florida.

I have zero respect for unreformed murderer rapists and other criminals, regardless of whether they are the butcher the baker or the candlestick maker.

Meredith was far better looking than Knox, who I wouldn't describe as 'beautiful' at all, but very ordinary. If anything, gaunt, haggard and scraggy. However, comparisons are odious.

No Vixen, you don't get to change the rules on the fly to cover for your failings. You flat out proved you couldn't even comprehend a simple concept covered in a short interview. You had no idea what she was talking about. And now, rather than having the courage to admit you got something horribly wrong, you try to change directions... throw some blame on Amanda. And the irony of it is you've got that all screwed up as well. The fictional character Amanda was created by the media, authors and online bloggers, aided by a steady stream of false information from the investigation. That fictional character started taking shape almost immediately after she was first taken into custody. There are hundreds of newspaper and tabloid headlines/articles, several early books and at least two pro-guilt websites, all created before Amanda ever had a chance to say anything, that proves this point. Those are the ones who created a fictional character names Amanda. Not Amanda.

Just when I think you've hit rock bottom you start digging again. I once said you were nothing if not persistent, but persistence isn't a good thing when all your doing is lying, making mistakes and disgustingly insulting people with false claims. I can only hope you managed to apologize to Stacy by the time I get caught up in this thread, but somehow I doubt it.

It might be true the tabloid media latched onto the scandal of an American student being involved in such an aggressive crime. However, you cannot extrapolate that 'gutter press' view to everyone who remains convinced the pair had a fair trial and that the verdict well-founded by the evidence.

Dear Stachyhs, I do apologise for mistaking you to be connected to Amanda Knox and her entourage in any way. I appreciate the horrible feeling of shame this may have caused you. So now the record is straight.

You are clearly on a roll... not a good one, mind you, but one just the same.

No one else was seriously considered. We know the police decided that Laura and Filomena had an alibi, as did the British girls. The police questioned them early on, not as suspects but as witnesses who might shed some light on who might be guilty. The British girls gave a statement and then returned to England. And further follow-up with the police were done with the English police. Laura and Filomena immediately lawyered up and so never faced the type of treatment Amanda and Raffaele both claim they received. The police did not tap the phones of anyone other than Amanda, Raffaele and people close to them. And the police never even hinted at suspecting anyone but Amanda and Raffaele, and they made that clear on numerous occasions.

By the time the English girls were home, and Laura and Filomena had their lawyers, Amanda and Raffaele were still rather adamant that they spent the evening together, were not at the cottage and didn't see Patrick. So please, do yourself a favor and don't make a bigger idiot of yourself. Amanda and Raffaele were subjected to far longer interviews and were the only ones interrogated, and they did so without the help of lawyers. So no, your nonsense won't work here. The situations were entirely different.

That's rubbish. Both Knox and Raff declined a lawyer. Raff would have known that everybody in Italy takes a lawyer with them to the Questura (even Albanian crook wassisname).

Police tapped the phones of quite a few people (eg, Sophie and Shaky). It proves they were taking the investigation seriously. Thye have better things to do with their time than trying to frame a virginal catholic Italian homey and a dull nondescript woman from the States.

I've decided not to report Vixen for accusing me of the vile lie of "cruelly mocking another poster's disabled child just because he is PGP". The fact that she has failed to provide any evidence of such an incident is enough. I'd rather her false and sick accusation stay here for all to see than have it deleted.

You did do this, Stacyhs - think back to your jibes about autistic children. I will not reproduce your message as that would be repeating your defamatory and unfounded comments.